Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

6

You can have multiple sitemaps per website, and this is a great example of when that makes sense. You should make sure you have a Sitemap Index listing each of your sitemaps. It will probably look something like: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <sitemapindex xmlns="http://www.sitemaps.org/schemas/sitemap/0.9"> <sitemap> ...


5

I'm not sure if this changed over the years since this was asked; while in theory you can (as the first answer states), in practice Google at least will give you an error (as seen in their Webmaster Tools): Incorrect Sitemap index format: Nested Sitemap indexes The Google help page further states: A sitemap index file can't list other sitemap index ...


5

Yes. Everything you ask for is possible. And here's an example XML sitemap file generated by the Drupal XML sitemap module with a little bit of configuration. Everything is done for you out of the box. http://softkube.com/sitemap.xml If you check the code of the XML file there's a link to an XSL and inside that file you can see the code with references to ...


4

Google looks at things differently than we do. Sorry. That is just the way it is. Sometimes you have to see things from Google's perspective before the data makes sense. The Google Webmaster Tools data lags behind a couple of days and some elements a bit more. As far as the various Index Counts, this explains why the difference. However, there is no direct ...


4

Those pages are not high quality pages. Who would want to land on page five of unanswered questions on this site? Nobody. These are low quality pages because: They only a list made of of content found elsewhere on your site. If a user does land on this type of page, they have to click to the content. Even if a user does want a list of this type of ...


4

Yeah. I have seen this too. You are not alone. I don't see any reason to do this. In fact it is redundant isn't it? And since sitemaps are designed to inform search engine about resources to be indexed and sitemaps are not indexed, it seems rather pointless. It was always a silly thing to do. You will see silly things all over the place especially in ...


4

You're better off creating a multilingual sitemap, just to avoid any source of confusion. The format you have shown is correct. In fact, you could even drop the hreflang declarations in your page sections and just use the declaration within the sitemap. The Official Webmaster Tools blog explains the advantages of using the multilingual sitemaps ...


3

Google does not treat CSS content the same as that on page Generally Google will only attempt to index content that is actually embedded within the page content associated with an appropriate tag such as <img>. You can however attempt to force Google's hand by adding the path of the background image into a image sitemap. Some Schema markups require ...


3

There are four valid addresses...and they all show the same site; they are synonyms (no re-direction). Prior to considering your sitemap, which is not essential for Google to index your site, you should deal with all the duplicate content issues you have going on here. As covered in this Google Webmaster Tools help doc: Duplicate content generally ...


3

It seems like you have your HTTP and HTTPS sites redirect to the HTTPS version of your www.example.com. This is good. Just know there is a cost for this initially. In your case, only one sitemap will ever be seen. It is the HTTPS version of your www.example.com site. Any sitemap should reflect both HTTPS and www in the URLs that are listed. Any other URL ...


3

There are no SEO benefits to serving a compressed XML sitemap over serving one that is not compressed. The advantage of compression is simply to save bandwidth and the time it takes to download. (If your sitemap is huge.) Note that the limits for the size of the sitemap are the uncompressed size (ie. 50MB uncompressed for Google).


2

No, you can't submit the exact same sitemap (same syntax, same URLs), and expect Google to sort out what kinds of assets you're trying to identify. If you submit a sitemap that you intend to be for your videos, and it doesn't have the required Video sitemap syntax, and contain the required video-specific tags, Google won't see it as a video sitemap. It's ...


2

Yes, sitemap index files can refer to mRSS files, but you can also submit them individually if you want. You can't link to mRSS files from normal (non-index) sitemap files though. In addition to the help center page you mentioned, there's also a bit about the differences between these files in an older blog post.


2

Install the Yoast SEO plugin on both installations and then add the generated sitemaps to your Google Webmasters account. Google Webmasters allows you to submit multiple sitemaps, so it should be pretty straight forward.


2

Yes that link have nothing to see. But you can use following if you want to remove page from google search : Remove page URL from google


2

Not sure if you saw this. Here is a guide from Google describing tactics for your seperated mobile URL situation: Method for mobile with 2 URL's Basically you set the desktop site as canonical, and mobile as alternate, then use tags to point bots to either-or mode using a preferred hierarchy. Do almost the same for sitemap, only you can use rel and ...


2

Sitemaps have almost no effect on rankings. You don't need a sitemap to have your pages rank well. In fact, it has been suggested that using sitemaps is a red herring. You instead should be spending time making sure your site links to all your content. See The Sitemap Paradox. The only time that I can imagine that submitting fresh sitemaps regularly ...


2

some days ago Give it time! You already have the appropriate 301 redirects set up (by Google) from the old to the new. The old URLs are still indexed. It will take time (weeks, months, ...) for Google to update its index. The only other thing you could do, if you've not already, is to use the "change of address tool". ...


2

The short answer is it doesn't matter. Google doesn't really care where your sitemap is located as long as it can find it. My personal preference would be to have one 'main' sitemap at example.co.uk/sitemap.xml that lists different maps for your site. This way you could have one map for your desktop pages and one for your mobile pages, for example: ...


2

I think that what you'll want to do is change the way your system works. If no language is specified in the URL, but you detect the language via the browser settings, then your site should redirect the user to a URL with that language in the path. This is for two reason: 1) Duplicate content. Spiders/Bots will come to test.com/books, test.com/booken, and ...


2

No, the shortened URL should not go in the XML sitemap. The shortened URL presumably redirects to the long (canonical) URL. Only the canonical URL should appear in the XML sitemap. If the canonical URL is an external resource then that wouldn't be in the XML sitemap either. (The XML sitemap identifies resources on your own site that you want to be ...


2

It seems these days that a sitemap in the root named sitemap.xml will get picked up by dang near anyone in time. It all depends on how much control you want. If you do not want just anyone reading your sitemap including scrapper bots, then name it something unique and submit it to Google, Bing, and who ever else you want. Do not put it in your robots.txt ...


2

Of course. XML is just XML and can be served as XHTML by using XSL if you wish and styled with CSS.


2

Sitemaps have very little effect on SEO. See The Sitemap Paradox. Deleting your old sitemaps shouldn't be an issue. Google will continue to crawl and index the URLs they contain even when the sitemaps are no longer there. In fact, getting Google to forget about URLs is pretty much impossible. If you have new sitemap files that list the URLs you ...


2

Google will automatically crawl links as it finds them unless it runs into a link labeled as "nofollow" or a page with a robots tag containing "nofollow" in it. If you plan to make a webpage on your site as a sitemap page, then try to make it user friendly by giving some sort of description of what each set of target URLs are about. To make google ...


2

Google Sitemap Compression Support It's interesting to read Google's decision to use poorly worded documentation on what sitemaps are or are not supported. Here is a quote from Google Webmaster Tools regarding an error message received when uploading a archived file. Google couldn't process your sitemap because we couldn't uncompress it. This error ...


2

As Closetnoc mentioned in his comment, GZ is just a compressed version of your text sitemap. So my answer to your question Should I include just the .gz file in the robots.txt or both? There is no point in submitting both sitemap.xml as well as sitemap.xml.gz. Most of the search engine bots can read the compressed content. So if you are submitting ...


2

I originally read you question as the number of indexed pages from your sitemap is 1500 and that you are worried. Then I thought about it. Perhaps there are things you need to know. If your site is new, then it will take quite a while for a new site to be indexed. I am not sure how old your site is, but it can take as much as a year for some sites to sink ...


2

You do not want your XML sitemap to include duplicate content. In your case, it sounds like that one product exists at multiple URLs, which is the very definition of duplicate content. So, what I'd say is that you want to have the page mywebsite.com/product1 (the canonical version of the URL) in your XML sitemap, then keep the others out of your XML sitemap. ...


1

That is fine. It is not always possible to link all of your pages. I have almost 600,000 pages not linked except with cross links between some of them. They are all in the sitemap. Google and Bing are fine with this. They have to be. They do not write the rules for the web.



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible